ODT hasn’t treated the following “Opinion piece” with due deference, it’s something to miss —no link at ODT Online. Mr Pickford probably forgot to ask that his propaganda be broadcast. Ah well.

ODT 12.10.15 (page 7)

The PROPOSED 2GP at 1600 pages is the biggest TURN OFF in Dunedin Planning History, ever.

—

The 2GP is the second generation district plan; and YOU, THE COMMUNITY, OWN this regulatory document once it is fully operational. Unfortunately, City Planning thinks THEY own it for your own good. Forget that. Eyeball the bastards and be prepared to defend your realms. Expect to meet with senior management of DCC, get past the desk staff. Most important —go straight to the top: group and general managers, and the chief executive. Avoid lower pond life. Cut to the chase.

Make no mistake, your property if it lies in the City Rise will be GREATLY AFFECTED. There’s very serious stuff going on if you live in a natural hazards zone. But what about your business, read very carefully. Buy a Resource Management specialist if you want to truly defend your property, its use and its value – or if you seek something different, time to stop writing invective just DEAL to the 1600 pages before the submission deadline in November. Write further submissions. Appeal the 2GP to Glory at Environment Court. Go to the High Court if you must. Etc. Etc.

Start your submission with the fact that the hearings panel is not INDEPENDENT and you protest this – councillors should not be sitting on the panel – at the moment Cull’s followers have a voting majority to push their green agendas through. STOP THE ROT. Already, you haven’t been served natural justice. Demand experienced independent commissioners from out of district that DCC hasn’t got to.

The DANGER is, if you’re a Ratepayer and you think you can deal with the 2GP through a DCC-produced summary you are BARKING MAD, you will sign your life away immediately. Wise up.

This piece written in 2009, predicts that local authorities would introduce such methods as the 2GP and that you should resist such planning as the endgame is your poverty, perhaps the death of your grandchildren, certainly attempts to chemically castrate many, and an intention to have the United Nations controlling all world activities including standing armies.

As Helen Clark is expected to be the next head of the UN, can you imagine a world run by Helen – with an uncontrolled ARMY.

God can’t help us, only resistance to sustainability measures, those of Cull, MacTavish et al.

“Several hundred homes” could be included in the new hazard zones, and landowners feared geo-technical reports would be required for each affected property.

### ODT Online Fri, 16 Oct 2015Land instability concern in plan
By Chris Morris and Craig Borley
New rules about land instability are emerging as a key issue in Dunedin City Council public meetings on the second generation district plan. About 130 people attended a presentation on the plan (2GP) at Macandrew Bay on Wednesday night, after about 70 people had gathered in Mosgiel to discuss it on Tuesday night. Another presentation was made in Middlemarch last night.

—

2GP main issues (via ODT)
● Changes to rules for heritage precincts and buildings.
● “Natural hazards” section detailing hazardous areas and management of them.
● Heritage plan to encourage use of heritage buildings.
● Inner city residential zones with a 12m maximum building height – up from 9m.
● Commercial and mixed use zones, including Warehouse Precinct, providing a range of permitted activities.
● Holding pattern for South Dunedin development.
● Urban sprawl boundary line between residential and rural land.

Yes Elizabeth the opinion piece attributed to Simon Pickford (ODT 16.10.15) as well as the response by the city development manager in response to B Lawton (Outram property owner) seem like advocacy statements to me in the ‘we know best style’. The real danger is that they will barrel on with their own agenda and ignore the public.

But the critical point to note is that the housing minister (Nick Smith) said that the new plan proposed by the Dunedin City Council “is open for public submissions. I encourage residents to engage with the council on the changes and test the specific hazard information to ensure that they are reasonable and practical”.

And the real key is test…to ensure that they are reasonable and practical.

The danger is the tendency of bureaucrats to make work for themselves essentially for whatever reason. But the costs for all that bear upon the rate and tax payers.

OH! Yes, I get it. In the old days there were natural hazards you couldn’t do anything about, and others you could by clearing stuff out of watercourses, putting in stormwater drains that had the capacity to take more than an average day’s rainfall…. And there were slight risks that could be made into big risks by, frinstance, clearing trees and shrubs including weed species off steep slopes leaving not only nothing but grass to absorb extra water, but also a network of shrinking and decaying roots == underground tubes so the hillside can get well and truly saturated and unstable.

Now there’s a better way of “planning” – don’t bother making hazards into mere inconveniences, don’t protect hillsides from dumb chainsaw massacres. Do it the modern “don’t blame us, we ain’t got nuthin’ to do with it” way. Label it hazard. Natural hazard because natural is good, like organic and sustainable.
Spray the region with labels then make like the guy in the TV advt, spray and walk away.

ODT: You say “It is encumbent on everyone to get informed [about the DCC Second Generation District Plan]”. You say this after displaying a total lack of initiative towards helping the citizens understand the significant changes contained in the 2GP.

There is no doubt in my mind that the changes which should be of serious concern to us are the ones that the DCC have made difficult to read. They will also prefer that there is no publicity about these parts of the 2GP. No publicity means no objections, no mediations and no court cases. Avoiding publicity in this way shows us that DCC staff don’t care much about democracy and genuine consultation.

The 2GP can be viewed HERE. To understand how a public document can have parts that are hidden from public awareness, just try to read the thing. Apart from reading it, the other challenge is understanding the implications of the various rules and policies. It is a dereliction of your duty to tell us that the plan is hugely significant and that we should get informed, but do absolutely nothing to help that happen. The DCC also has an obligation (a legal obligation) to adequately consult about the 2GP. [Abridged]

My guess is that with you sitting on your fat arse, or perhaps deliberately colluding with the DCC to keep some things secret, that the new plan will be approved without any fuss and with the vast majority of citizens being completely unaware of a variety of nasty changes.

Yes, Elizabeth – the last bit was too much for the ODT. I don’t criticise them, though. We can see that they will tolerate a reasonably strong level of criticism. We can also see what crosses the line – and therefore be better able to know what will be printed and what won’t.
They need a good shaking. I haven’t seen any change with the new editor, Barry Stewart (aka Sergeant Schultz, who “sees nothing!”). Barry calls the style of the ODT “conservative” (CH39). I think we can see what he means.

It’s simply Agenda21. The incumbent mayoral ‘cabal’ have been brainwashed and the staff of course are straight out of academia with no life experience other than how to manipulate and spend other peoples’ money. 1600 pages! and exhortations to submit, knowing full well the population is generally unable to spend the time to read, wouldn’t understand if they did. No, the outcome is already done and dusted and we move on the next step towards subjugation. George Orwell was certainly prophetic.

Calvin. What the Dunedin public with balls and lawyers must do is seek that the 2GP is set aside, judicially.

The Proposed plan in its current form (and page length) and given the extremely tight (did I say ludicrous) 2-month submission period, and the fact that the hearings panel has no true independence (the voting being stacked due to the number of councillors as panelists, all of whom have conflicts of interest) means NO ONE should accept the lack of Natural Justice. NO ONE.

Don’t sound like a Dunedin sheep, Calvin. Anyone thinking the 2GP must be treated as a fait accompli is spineless and defeatest. Full of treachery, a victim not a fighter – an acceptor of the slime and incompetence personified by Cull’s council and the Bidrose turkey farm (staff and management).

A Dunedin sheep I may be Elizabeth, but I’ve seen enough of the process of public submitting to know that at best you might, just might get an acknowledgement thanking you, or at worst ignored completely. I know as I reckon I would have to be one of the most ignored. It has little to do with ‘balls and lawyers’ except money. Better to treat them all with the disdain they deserve.

Legal only works when it’s actioned.
Look at police vs car “misappropriation”. Look at thugby twosome vs Cull – legal-schmegal, they got the money, he got the shame. Opposite to what should have happened, but that’s “legal” for you.
Look at LGOIMA, look at censorship, oops, rename it and it’s not so ugly: redaction.
Look at poor people pleading guilty for a reduced sentence because they can’t afford the same law as e.g. the teen tossers whose parents objected to school punishing them for being smartypants at airport.
Legal rights? Don’t make me laugh, I got a cracked lip.

Depressed am I, having to agree with Calvin about the futility about reading and thinking and writing and submitting and attending to speak to my submission, for many years. Result, much the same as staying home hand-crafting egg cosies.

I bring up sheep because Dunedin has been remiss year in year out in not establishing a vocal and strident resident and ratepayer association armed with pro bono professionals (they exist, they’re residents and ratepayers too).

Forget the victim-fed class system that seems to render mutton.
Thank god I didn’t grow up in doom-clad Dunners.

I still find it hard to understand why a city the size of Dunedin has no residents and ratepayers association. It’s really STRANGE. Yet when Denis Dorney called a meeting to set one up a couple of years ago, only a handful of people turned up (most of whom were associated with political parties) and the ODT reports were dismissive to the point of ridiculing the whole enterprise and the meagre numbers interested. Also, I noticed during the public stadium debate, we didn’t really have a public debate at all, more like just mud-slinging and name-calling. Has this APATHY (or fearfulness) just become institutionalized behaviour after the amalgamation vacuum? Or has it always been a ‘toe the line or you’ll never work in this town again’ sort of power play? Had too many Dunedin residents with get up and go got up and gone? I’m hoping more outsiders will recognize what a good place to live this is and, after coming here, stand up and protect it, as you would think would be a normal attitude towards one’s home.
I blame the incomprehensibility of 2GP on central government requirements, aimed IMO at keeping regions under Wellington’s thumb. Something on TV’s Q + A programme this morning about more regional autonomy. Good. One size does NOT fit all.

Diane, probably all of the above. Prior to amalgamation of local councils and boroughs there was some considerable distaste towards and abhorrence of Dunedin City Council – that club of old boys who were frankly regarded as deadwood but with considerable power to throttle business initiative that wasn’t theirs (old Tartan tricks), and best avoided.

Central government’s requirement for amalgamation just spread the boys’ influence and control over more private assets geographically (stated at its simplest). Yes the bright progressives tended to depart the city for any number of reasons but leaving in effect a mainly acquiescent “safe” disinterested (in local government) population.

That’s a massive stereotypical assertion I’m making, but let’s face it, you like I have made it an individual mission to sit in on many council meetings in different timespans/years to witness life forms and processes. The general lack of public engagement and activism in critical tranches of ‘district business’ is truly frightening.

This is why I enjoy writers, known and anonymous, at What if? getting their points and queries across – all the time mindful that the city’s monopoly newspaper picks its causes to not upset Cull’s council or other players and activities the newspaper’s owners have investment in – or friends they would wish to protect – for ultimately blind power and control of the ‘dying’ city (ongoing retrenchment).

An old editorial, for Dunedin the city of very low growth…. We’re not Auckland, Christchurch or Queenstown – LGNZ has no right to be whispering stupid ideology in Dave’s ear, and he has no right to be listening in a way that subverts and damages our place, New Zealand’s ONLY heritage city – a city of relative STASIS and declining well-paid employment. Dave is a short man.

—

### ODT Online Tue, 28 Oct 2014Editorial: Making room for a new reality
OPINION For many people, the Kiwi dream of owning a house on a quarter-acre section in Godzone has become just that. Increasing urban drift, immigration, and building which has not kept pace with demand have all contributed to a housing crisis in our biggest cities. […] The combined pressure now means those tasked with planning at central and local government levels are faced with tough decisions, and many city dwellers are facing a very different reality to that enjoyed by previous generations. At a fundamental level the choice is between larger dwellings and sections but urban sprawl, or smaller homes and sections but more medium-density inner-city development.Read more

@Elizabeth
October 18, 2015 at 9:11 pm
You say:
Here’s a manager to shove out the council door along with the beleaguered CE.
Couldn’t agree more.
I can’t believe this level of ‘micromanagement’. We simply don’t need such people anywhere near the town hall.

I don’t think Dunedin does require provision for increased residential density, but rather that this will be destructive, especially around the central city. I think this proposed provision is a result of smart lobbying by those who want to make money out of house to flat conversions, increasing the number of bedrooms and also even keeping up the university’s appeal as a life-style place where you can rent cool old heritage buildings close to the university. (And, maybe, then trash them.) Which is all ridiculous as there is already an oversupply of studio rooms and the tertiary providers are building more purpose-built accommodation. This won’t drive rents down – will just make it impossible for some landlords to cover their costs and put them out of business. Then we will see even more ‘demotion by neglect’.
Not sure where exactly in the proposed Plan I can say this though. Would have to go through density policies and rules for all zones I think.

39 Dunedin Television Published on Oct 20, 2015
Locals find it easier to build on their sections

—

HOW TO DEGRADE THE NEIGHBOURHOOD, DCC WANTS TO ALLOW FUGLY BOXES FOR CARS AND WRINKLIES —STOP THE ROT

[annotated]

Dunedin City Council – Media Release
Family flats better catered for under 2GP

This item was published on 16 Oct 2015

There will be less paperwork and no consent costs for family flats in most instances if changes proposed to the Dunedin City District Plan go ahead. Family flats, commonly known as granny flats, are not provided for under the current plan and generally require resource consent. Under the Proposed Second Generation Dunedin City District Plan (2GP), family flats are permitted activities in all zones except medium density zones. This means resource consent would not be needed, as long as performance standards are met. The standards include a limit on the size of the flat, a requirement to share connections to water and waste services, and the need to meet overall development density limits.

DCC City Development Manager Anna Johnson says one of the key issues facing Dunedin is changing demographics, including an ageing population and an increase in single person households. “We realise older people often want to live in the same neighbourhood, or live independently with the support of family.” For these reasons, two other changes are also proposed in the 2GP.

One is that the status of retirement villages, rest homes and student hostels would change from non-complying to discretionary in residential zones. That means these activities are anticipated, but will still need resource consent to make sure the scale, design and location are appropriate.

[DCC bullshit move —reducing green space with NO DESIGN GUIDELINES PROPOSED] The other proposed change would introduce two new medium density zones, one relating to defined areas within existing urban parts of Dunedin and Mosgiel, generally close to centres, and one near the campus between the Town Belt and the central business district.

Density relates to how many residential units there are per site area. Medium density housing can be in the form of houses on small sections, semi-detached or terraced houses, or two to three storey apartment buildings on larger sections. Much of South Dunedin and the residential areas around the University of Otago are examples of areas that are already developed to a “medium density” level. [THE STUDENT GHETTO] Johnson says as well as providing for a range of community housing choices, other key goals for the city’s residential zones include maintaining or creating attractive streetscapes and protecting amenity and public open space.

As part of meeting these goals, car parking requirements in residential zones have been reviewed. Key changes proposed include removing car parking requirements for scheduled heritage buildings to encourage re-use. The number of residential car parks required with a development would be based on the number of habitable rooms (rooms that are designed to be, or could be, used a bedroom) rather than floor area and the number of residential units. The current District Plan does not allow garages and carports in front yards. However, in many parts of Dunedin this is the only part of the site where these can be built. As a result, there are many resource consent applications for these activities and these are usually granted, with conditions.

The 2GP seeks to reduce resource consent requirements, where possible, so it is proposed that instead of requiring resource consent for new garages and carports in front yards, these would be permitted if they met performance standards. These standards relate to setback, scale and the amount of road frontage and front yard space used.

Performance standards for boundary fences have also been revised and stricter controls are proposed for boundaries with the road or reserves. The overall height limit of 2m for residential fences has not changed, but the 2GP proposes that part of the fence over 1.4m (or 40% of the overall structure including gates) must be partially see-through, by using trellis or spaced palings etc. This requirement is to improve public safety, reduce the risk of property crime and maintain the amenity of neighbourhoods.

Other proposed changes include limiting the amount of hard surfacing you can have on your property. This is to help with water run-off, which has an effect on the stormwater network, and it also has benefits for residential amenity.

Johnson says the community has been involved in preparing the 2GP and there has been a lot of discussion with residents over the past three years about what the new plan should contain. The ultimate goal of the 2GP is the sustainable management of Dunedin’s natural and physical resources.

█ The 2GP is open for public submissions until 5pm, Tuesday, 24 November.

The 2GP has been prepared as an electronic plan and is most easily viewed online at http://www.2gp.dunedin.govt.nz. Printed copies will also be available for inspection at the 2GP drop-in centre at 11 George Street, Dunedin and at Dunedin Public Libraries and Service Centres.

At the drop-in centre, staff are available from Monday to Friday to answer questions about the 2GP and show you how to make a submission. Community workshops are also being held.

The DCC is required to follow a formal process in terms of submissions, further submissions, hearings and potential appeals. More information on this is available on the 2GP website.

How do you evaluate what is ‘medium density’? Could you take the density permitted in the General Residential (ie suburban) Zone as a standard and then say ‘medium density’ is some multiple of this? Would ‘medium density’ be twice the density? What is it actually in the proposed Plan? Four times as much? I’m not sure…. but if it was four times as much, would this be more accurately called ‘high density’?
Impermeable surfaces are restricted to allow for better and faster stormwater run-off but driveways must still have hard, impermeable surfaces 3 metres in from the road frontage. When I inquired about this provision, I was told gravel etc contributes to break up of the footpaths. But with hard surfacing required plus a driveway crossing permit which costs money, landowners won’t find it that cheap to create more off-street parking.
Allowing carports and garages in front yards (provided they meet certain standards) is a good idea IMO, since many streets will never be widened and are cluttered with parked cars.
Not sure how you ‘protect’ residential heritage values by allowing ‘medium’ (or high?) residential density and waiving onsite parking requirements. Thought the reverse would have done the job much better.

2GP and STUDENT STUFFERS. Provisions for inner city, including residential heritage areas: third storey allowed (up from two), no restriction on the number of bedrooms (habitable rooms), no restriction on the number of people per bedroom. No legal remedy if existing land owners lose their sun from new developments. And yet this is called ‘medium density’ in the plan. Yes, medium density compared to everyone STACKED IN STANDING!
If Dunedin wants to protect the amenity values of the inner city residential areas, including heritage buildings AND their open spaces, green space, trees and gardens, then we need not just ‘urban renewal’ but ‘HERITAGE RESTORATION’. Too many modern cities have ‘dead hearts’, because the pressure to develop stuff close to everything financially drives away ordinary residential use, squeezing buildings in close to boundaries. I think the Plan Review would be better structured around protecting and upholding existing use rights of present inner city residents, particularly those putting in the effort and expense preserving heritage buildings and enhancing heritage neighbourhoods, something which benefits everybody by contributing to the city’s amenity values and just sheer beauty. As 2GP stands now, those owners will be driven out by development of ‘student stuffers’, when there is already an over-supply of flats and studio rooms. There could be no worse ‘DEAD HEART’ for Dunedin City than lots of empty flats and no open spaces, green space, trees or gardens left. I expect the university roll to drop as tertiary education becomes less affordable and is recognised as no guaranteed entry to a job – also as a consequence of aging overall population. Dunedin would be better to aim at attracting retiring baby boomers to relocate here by proving opportunities for a safe, convenient, gracious and cultured inner city residential lifestyle, a strategy which also makes the city charming and appealing to overseas visitors and tourists. With arts and culture attractions, like the recent piano recital at Olveston. And further promotion of the local music scene, maybe with a bit of rock and blues revival. Which is what aging baby boomers (like me) enjoy and have the money to pay for. (Bring on covers of the Rolling Stones, Janis Joplin and Tina Turner!). Inner city heritage restoration would make the city genuinely unique internationally, in contrast to some fake ‘city branding’ thought up by a marketing department.

Diane, I really enjoyed reading
your thoughts on the Proposed 2GP’s potential cumulative adverse effects on inner city residences. You are bang on the nail for what should be preserved and maintained – not eroded. The desk huggers at DCC who are just out of school have no concept of the Heritage values (and refuse to assess and recognise them in their totality before assigning free reign to developer bulldozers). It’s disgusting – ratepayers and renters responsible for maintaining these private assets and providing our Sense of Place (not the council to date) are being treated like sitting ducks as DCC talks shop with speculator developers for economic gain (they think!!!).

In New Zealand’s only heritage city which has a well developed pattern of little or no population growth, we have the concept of “medium density” being inappropriately applied and without new design guidelines to ensure quality densification. Due to the spatial plan / 2GP process we’re stuffed before we start. Unless we take “medium density” to task for being acontextual and unwarranted at the 2GP hearings.

All up, the DCC planners lack three-dimensional architectural design expertise and it perfectly shows. They like lambs for slaughter will be hit upon in the weeks ahead. Here we come.

Lee unfortunately still carries too much baggage from the anti-sense campaigners including ODT who repeatedly pinned derogatory labels on him. There are enough lazy voters, the ones with just enough energy to vote but not to observe and think, for him to be out of contention as Mayor. It has been encouraging to note in the odt online comments that people – some people who stay politically awake between elections – have been remarking on his sense as steadily so many of his predictions have come true, and his grasp of the difference between chucking money around like drunken sailors, and wisely doing what needs to be done for the good of the city. Necessities, infrastructure, not Visions/hallucinations and not appointments of overpaid managers, facilitators, initiative-drivers and talkfest specialists to fritter away the halluci-vis-ydelic budget.

Most encouraging feedback and reassurance, Elizabeth, that the impressions I have formed on this topic during my 15 years in Dunedin are not out of touch with reality. All the more since I have read that you are a qualified architect with some degree of expertise in heritage building preservation plus a view of the Dunedin situation over many years, perhaps a number of decades. We learn of the Council planners’ qualifications but a serious problem with academic training is that one size does not fit all and knowledge of local conditions and history is essential for good local governance and city design. But the people who know how to work the system too often win in the consultation process, particularly when it is foreshadowed with invitation only ‘stake-holder’ meetings. This planning process is too often forbiddingly complicated for people who just want to live in their homes in peace.
You would be informing me and no doubt many of your site’s readers if you were to make a post regarding your relevant qualifications and experience. The dire situation with the current Dunedin City District Plan Review may yet be retrievable if enough residents of this city can be persuaded how much they would stand to lose if this proposed Plan were to be adopted unchanged. And people with credibility because of their training, background and local knowledge are likely to be more persuasive.

Diane, [a laboured spiel] after a great many years on organising and consulting committees about town I went underground to regroup energies and get a life! Organisations and committees can drain, particularly the creative life. So I stopped mass voluntary commitments after 20 years’ grind mainly to look after a self needing to singlehandedly manage and support elderly kith and kin – as many women are called on to do, intergenerationally. I’m now in re-emergence/surgence mode, gradually, hopefully, staking claims more suited to my design background, networks and experience, which is:

I come from a family farming and commercial background (East Otago). From the age of eleven I wanted to study architecture. I completed two fulltime 4-year professional degrees, BArch (1984) and MArch (1990), at the University of Auckland School of Architecture. I taught in the fields of Architectural Design and Design Studies respectively at Auckland (1987-89) and Otago (1991-94) universities, underscored by continuing research in contemporary philosophy and post-feminist theory. Academically, my strengths centre on urban design, three-dimensional architectural experience, contemporary commercial facade articulation, graphic design and hand rendering methods for design process, reinforced and informed by poststructural positioning, contemporary fashion and the visual arts. I served on the Auckland School’s professional academic jury (1987-89).

These ‘roots’ with research skills led into various light project work for Dunedin City Council (including audit work and property file amalgamation) and Dunedin Public Art Gallery, before obtaining a position with a nationwide dealer gallery (team effort) supporting and promoting the work of New Zealand’s best mid-career and senior contemporary visual artists, to domestic and international public, private and institutional clients, investors, building project managers and corporates.

At the same time I took on the Otago chairship for New Zealand Historic Places Trust (2000-2009), and coordinatorship of the Otago Branch RMA Advisory Subcommittee (spanning DCC, CODC and CDC council areas), meaning close work with clients, NZHPT staff and management (regional and national), and the National Board, through many years of imposed restructuring of the organisation to achieve Autonomous Crown Entity status and associated change of legislation to effectively end community representation and grow professional advisory services (Heritage New Zealand). I represented NZHPT Otago Branch on the Dunedin Heritage Fund Committee (2000-09). In January 2009, I received a national award for Meritorious Service from the NZHPT Board.

I’m not a registered architect. I served on the NZIA Southern branch committee (Otago Southland) for a number of years as a Colleague Member. I also served as a jury member for NZIA awards in 2010.

I have been active in kindred organisations, such as the Southern Urban Design Forum, and various leadership and steering committees informing architecture, urban design and public art initiatives in association with Dunedin City Council.

Establishing the Otago Farmers Market (launched March 2003) with a small group of colleagues ‘extracted’ from the DCC Princes Street Working Party, a voluntary urban design initiative, is a highlight of group strategy, research and delivery undertaken in the private sector with (initially) hard-fought council acceptance and support. The farmers market, a multimillion-dollar earner-enterprise for the participating collective of vendors, is well-proven and published as a very successful small business incubator, rural-urban conduit, employment generator, and tourism product.

I stay busy. And connected. I’m a generalist facilitator, by specialisation! Professionally, I continue to profile New Zealand practising artists’ forays into international markets. In the years 2010-2012, I contracted to Dunedin City Council for initial assessment of proposed character areas (mapping heritage, amenity and urban design values). Altogether, I have an effective quantum of hearing experience and am currently involved in two Environment Court appeals in support of Dunedin City Council hearing panel decisions. In publishing, I offer a range of editing and production management services.

I’m a member of the national body, Architecture + Women NZ; a member of the Southern Heritage Trust; and a registered supporter of the recently formed City Rise Up.

Despite inferences resulting from my posts or comments using ‘voices’, satire, yelling and whimsy at What if? Dunedin, I remain (as opposed to the voices….) politically neutral at Dunedin. The growing site audience remains incredulous.

It might help if people could be encouraged to submit using conversational style (like what is being used on the website) to describe the way they would like to see Dunedin city in the future. And let the planners convert a consensus derived from those visions into strategic directions, policies, objectives and rules.
I don’t like the way the submission form constrains people to identify their concerns chapter and verse, then tick off both either supporting it or opposing it or, if they seek and amendment, to put the exact alternative wording they want. There’s no legal requirement to make a submission in such a precise, legalistic way. Writing the submission form like this is IMO an attempt by the planners to 1) get submitters to do their work for them and 2) send a message that the plan is a done deal and only the most minor tweaking is allowed. Which is not true.

Diane, you write “aging baby boomers (like me) enjoy and have the money to pay for” which is an interesting point. Advertising agencies and TV seem to think the ones to pitch advertising at, therefore schedule programmes that appeal to, are teens to early thirties. Perhaps this is because at that age they are most easily convinced to part with their money for quick gratification, never mind the quality or usefulness. By boomer stage not only do most people have more disposable coin but they are ready to part with it WHEN there is something that really appeals. We’ve already had dozens of clear-outs, chucking out briefly desirable crap that chops and grates and cleans windows while removing cellulite as we sleep.
As for basing the local economy on battery-farming of students, anyone noticed what’s happening to schools? Amalgamating. Closing. Fewer children starting school, >> fewer going to high school. OU and DCC, you want I should draw a picture? Not just Dunedin. Not just NZ. China didn’t loosen up and change to 2-child families policy because they want to overcrowd their country, no, they want enough young people coming along to keep the show running when the oldies turn into crumblies. Another picture needed? Oh come on!

Elizabeth, I am really pleased to read that this site is POLITICALLY NEUTRAL (ie not endorsing any candidates in the upcoming local government elections). Because otherwise, there could be a legal requirement to take it down during the voting period (grey area here, as far as I know, with what could be considered online election advertising). But during the election period is probably the most important time for voters to be be able to access conversations, opinions and information about candidates – from a number of different viewpoints. And in Dunedin, that means just not from an Allied Press monopoly viewpoint. I know Allied Press own Otago Daily Times, the Star, Channel 39, Queenstown Mountain Scene – what else am I missing?. I read they own all the print media south of the Waitaki River – the lower South Island. Is this true? If so, you have to wonder why. There can’t be much money in print media nowadays – with the internet taking over news and advertising. Maybe it is the ‘aging Dunedin population’ that keeps them going because many are not yet online. (Maybe some can’t afford to be.)

Hype O”Thermia: regarding politicians having ‘good sense’ – or not, as the case might be, I like the ‘triune brain’ hypothesis that we have a ‘reptile brain’, a ‘mammal brain’ and a ‘human brain’. Reptile imperative is greed, lust and aggression – all blindly aimed at survival. No ethical behaviour here. Mammal brain is about nurturing and protecting your family and kinship group. Ethical behaviour applies only to the in-group and suspicion and hatred – xenophobia – towards everyone else. (Like the Daleks; See outsider and “Kill,kill, kill!”) Human brain – rationality at last, and even better, empathy, not just with all other humans but with all living things. So you really only get fairness and common sense (very UNCOMMON, in fact), when the human brain is not only engaged but completely in charge of the reptile and mammal brain. No tail wagging the dog!
Good politics requires elected reps who are fair and have good sense. Unfortunately, the very strong POWER DRIVE of the nasty grey lizards often gets them to the top of the tree. And then you also have the mammal family imperative which includes the good old boys who look after their mates and also feather their own nests. (Hmm, even though birds aren’t mammals , the metaphor still applies. Actually, so does the ‘hog in the trough’. And also ‘cock of the walk’ – the big ego trip. BIG MAN in town!)
Only the truly human part of the brain is capable of the concept of ‘enough’. The reptile and mammal parts are designed for survival by Nature to scream, “More! More! More!”. Which I conjecture is why you usually get wild over-spending from local body politicians. And a lot of other bad stuff from politicians at all levels.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triune_brain

Follow up to the above: The Dragons of Eden by Carl Sagan. Extraordinary speculation by Sagan that the normal consciousness of reptiles is equivalent to human dreaming. So if you wonder whether politicians are sometimes out of touch with reality, you might be right!https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dragons_of_Eden

The funny thing, locally, is that the person I’d have thought most likely to represent the Me-Me-Me (and my kind) viewpoint is ex-ACT Hilary Calvert.
Yet she is as fervently anti-waste, anti-dreams/Visions as Lee Vandervis. Their “visions” appear to be, a city that has necessary systems that work, that people can afford to live in, and no more “build it and they will come” or “we can lead the world in planet-saving” which is a kind of hubristic halo-hunt.
Andrew Wiley with his pro-business attitude – well, I’m glad he’s not in sole charge of the city, nevertheless it’s a good thing to have someone who speaks up for the need to have business – real business, not McJobs part-time on-call hospitality work – and when you get down to facts there’s a green or ethical objection possible for every human activity, including as the avid anti-green people tirelessly point out the fossil fuels used in getting to sustainability conferences and manufacturing bicycles.

Actually re ‘see through’ fences, I think there was a case in Auckland where the council had a similar requirement and wanted to enforce it. In other words, the gaps between someone’s fence palings were too small by a matter of millimetres and so the council was demanding the property owner take his fence down and rebuild it. I think this highlights how people drawing up regulations should think ahead to what will happen when they try to enforce their regulations. Whether enforcement (now described by the more weaselly word ‘compliance’) will amount to ridiculous actions on the part of the council.

And the ‘granny flats’ provision is a bit odd because, once these are built, how on earth would the council police whether they are really being used by a family member? And could they, without invading people’s privacy? I think this provision may, in practice, amount to in-fill housing. And eventually the ‘granny flats’ may become separate rental accommodation.

This plan is another in the long line of “build it and they will come” fiascos proposed by the DCC wallahs. Like the stadium, cycleways, Chinese garden and convention palaces, the wallahs believe that if more (and therefore an oversupply) cheap rental accommodation is provided, magically 10,000 more Dunedinites will rocket by bicycle down the motorway from somewhere.

The problem is that unless it’s 10,000 students (for which we do not have the facilities) it is a forlorn hope. Business and job opportunities are what attract humans and as evidenced by the sparcity of tenancies in Dunedin’s CBD, such opportunities are so rare as to be discounted.

The DCC may have a grand plan to attract these opportunities once accommodation is available, but like all the previous measures, the cart has been provided without the horse and a bicycle won’t cut it.

This is a piece I submitted to the ODT but Philip Somerville in his infinite wisdom refused to print it.

Dunedin City councillor Hilary Calvert outlined in these columns, (October 5th 2015) concerns regarding domestic fencing restrictions as detailed in the ‘Proposed Second Generation’ (2GP) DCC District Plan. And well she might. These details are encapsulated within the published draft containing no fewer than 1600 pages! Just what the chances of the average citizen stumbling across this kind of detail beggars the imagination.

In Mayor Dave Cull’s preamble he states: “developing a new District Plan is among the most influential things a council can do in shaping the city’s future”. But is this so? It would seem to me that this is an ever recurring exercise, each plan superseding the previous.

Over the years since at least 2001 we have had visionary outpourings such as, “Choices for the future, Towards 2021”, followed in 2003 by the DCC commissioned consultants Business and Economic Research Ltd (BERL) to produce an ‘Economic Profile’ of Dunedin City 2002.This was primarily for the DCC’s Economic Development Strategic Committee’s Plan in 2003. Through to 2011 we have the new, “Towards 2050, A Spatial Plan for Dunedin.” Mayor Dave Cull’s preamble to this states: “Earlier this year we went through the “Your City Our Future” exercise which invited all Dunedin residents to prioritise the Council’s future discretionary spending.” As far as I know this is still in place.

Now give or take a week or two, Dunedin started some time in 1848. The first settlers came armed with a basic grid plan produced by a Mr Kettle who we believe assumed the site was flat. It was used as a kick start development, and like all starters it evolved more or less ad hoc to suit the times and conditions. It became more formalised as time went by and boroughs and councils were structured. Standards were set in terms of structures and services, with building specifications, set backs, light spaces, drainage services and
standards as with water etc. Authorities were vested by the citizens to develop and refine these rules until today we have a plethora of materials specs, regulations and requirements to be met. Not least of which is the ‘Consents Process.’ All the while as times and technology has moved so have the rules. Oversight of these standards are covered (or meant to be ) by staff trained in their respective disciplines to ensure those standards are met.

The ‘envisioning’ thing was, and is, a constant moving feast, as a city whether it is growing or not is a living amorphous thing. This is by legislation overlaid by the Annual Plan process which is essential for budgetary reasons (not that you would pick it recently). The result is hopefully an efficient city in which the citizens can live and operate with the minimum bother. In a word, a nice place to be.

Now the way I see it, this latest 1600 page ‘tome’ is nothing more than a make work and change for no other reason than to control. It all smacks of “Agenda 21” and it permeates right through the web of the citizens’ lifestyles and freedoms. Meanwhile the Mayor and most councillors simply seem mesmerised by the bureaucratic deliberations and have abrogated their control. The city is in real danger of being “Planned to Death”, destroying its attraction in the process.

### radionz.co.nz Updated at 6:57 am today
RNZ NewsUrban planning review may include RMA
By Catherine Hutton
The Productivity Commission is not ruling out recommending changes to the Resource Management Act as part of a widespread review of urban planning. The government has asked the commission to review urban planning rules and processes. […] Commission chairman Murray Sherwin said its previous work had identified problems with the current system […] “we identified some issues around the interaction of the key pieces of legislation, particularly the RMA, the Local Government Act and the Land Transport Management Act, all of which have different requirements for local government and get in the way of smooth operation.” Mr Sherwin said none of the current laws, including the RMA, were set up for urban planning. “What you’re trying to deal with, particularly as city’s become more compact. You’ve got externalities, you’ve got impacts from one person’s actions having an influence on the next person, on the neighbour. So it’s trying to work out those really quite complex interactions, between neighbours. You know basically where property rights stop and start.”

[Finance Minister] Bill English said the government wanted urban planning rules that helped keep housing affordable, and helped the productivity of the wider economy. He said many parts of the system were outdated and unwieldy and because international best practice had moved on, so must New Zealand. […] The commission will release a draft report next year, before delivering its final report on the best system for land use allocation to the government by December.Read more